Dutch guidelines for physiotherapy in patients with stress urinary incontinence: An update

Introduction and hypothesis: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the most common form of incontinence impacting on quality of life (QOL) and is associated with high financial, social, and emotional costs. The purpose of this study was to provide an update existing Dutch evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for physiotherapy management of patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in order to support physiotherapists in decision making and improving efficacy and uniformity of care. Materials and methods: A computerized literature search of relevant databases was performed to search for information regarding etiology, prognosis, and physiotherapy assessment and management in patients with SUI. Where no evidence was available, recommendations were based on consensus. Clinical application of CPGs and feasibility were reviewed. The diagnostic process consists of systematic history taking and physical examination supported by reliable and valid assessment tools to determine physiological potential for recovery. Therapy is related to different problemcategories. SUI treatment is generally based on pelvic floor muscle exercises combined with patient education and counseling. An important strategy is to reduce prevalent SUI by reducing influencing risk factors. Results: Scientific evidence supporting assessment and management of SUI is strong. Conclusions: The CPGs reflect the current state of knowledge of effective and tailor-made intervention in SUI patients

Pelvic floor muscle function in a general female population in relation with age and parity and the relation between voluntary and involuntary contractions of the pelvic floor musculature

Contains fulltext : 80525.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

One year effectiveness of an app-based treatment for urinary incontinence in comparison to care as usual in Dutch general practice:A pragmatic randomised controlled trial over 12 months

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term effectiveness of app-based treatment for female stress, urgency, or mixed urinary incontinence (UI) compared to care-as-usual in primary care. DESIGN: A pragmatic, randomised controlled, superiority trial. SETTING: Primary care in the Netherlands from 2015 to 2018, follow-up at 12 months. POPULATION: Women with ≥2 UI-episodes per week, access to mobile apps, wanting treatment. 262 women randomised equally to app or care-as-usual; 89 (68%) and 83 (63%) attended one year follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: The standalone app included conservative management for UI with motivation aids (e.g., reminders). Care-as-usual delivered according to the Dutch GP guideline for UI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Effectiveness assessed by the change in symptom severity score (ICIQ-UI-SF) and the change in quality of life (ICIQ-LUTS-QoL) with linear regression on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Clinically relevant improvement of UI severity for both app (-2.17 ± 2.81) and care-as-usual (-3.43 ± 3.6), with a non-significant mean difference of 0.903 (-0.66 to 1.871). CONCLUSION: App-based treatment is a viable alternative to care-as-usual for UI in primary care in terms of effectiveness after one year

Cost-effectiveness of an app-based treatment for urinary incontinence in comparison with care-as-usual in Dutch general practice:a pragmatic randomised controlled trial over 12 months

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of app-based treatment for female stress, urgency, or mixed urinary incontinence (UI) compared to care-as-usual in Dutch primary care. DESIGN: A pragmatic, randomised controlled, superiority trial. SETTING: Primary care in the Netherlands from 2015 to 2018, follow-up at 12 months. POPULATION: Women with ≥2 UI-episodes per week, access to mobile apps, wanting treatment. INTERVENTIONS: The standalone app included conservative management for UI with motivation aids (e.g., reminders). Care-as-usual delivered according to the Dutch GP guideline for UI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs and cost-effectiveness and -utility were assessed from a societal perspective, based on Incontinence Impact Adjusted Life Years (IIALYs), Quality Adjusted Life years (QALYs) and medical, non-medical and productivity costs. Information on costs was obtained with the iMCQ and iPCQ questionnaires (Medical Consumption and Productivity Cost Questionnaires). RESULTS: 262 women randomised equally to app or care-as-usual; 89 (68%) and 83 (63%) attended follow-up. Costs were lower for app-based treatment with €-161 (95%CI: -180 to -151) per year. Cost-effectiveness showed small mean differences in effect for IIALY (0.04) and QALY (-0.03) and thus larger ICER (-€3,696) and ICUR (€6,379) (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-utility Ratios). CONCLUSION: App-based treatment is a cost-effective alternative to care-as-usual for women with UI in Dutch primary care

App-Based Treatment in Primary Care for Urinary Incontinence:A Pragmatic, Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE: Electronic application (app)-based treatment is promising for common diseases with good conservative management options, such as urinary incontinence (UI) in women, but its effectiveness compared with usual care is unclear. This study set out to determine if app-based treatment for women with stress, urgency, or mixed UI was noninferior to usual care in the primary care setting. METHODS: The URinControl trial is a pragmatic, noninferiority randomized controlled trial in Dutch primary care including adult women with 2 episodes of UI per week. From July 2015 to July 2018, we screened 350 women for eligibility. A stand-alone app-based treatment with pelvic floor muscle and bladder training (URinControl) was compared with usual care according to the Dutch general practitioner guideline for UI treatment. Outcomes measured were change in symptom severity score from baseline to 4 months (primary outcome), impact on disease-specific quality of life, patient-perceived improvement, and number of UI episodes. Noninferiority (<1.5 points) was assessed with linear regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 262 eligible women were randomized equally; 195 of them had follow-up through 4 months. The change in symptom severity with app-based treatment (-2.16 points; 95% CI, -2.67 to -1.65) was noninferior to that with usual care (-2.56 points; 95% CI, -3.28 to -1.84), with a mean difference of 0.058 points (95% CI, -0.776 to 0.891) between groups. Neither treatment was superior to the other, and both groups showed improvements in outcome measures after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: App-based treatment for women with UI was at least as effective as usual care in the primary care setting. As such, app-based treatments, with their potential advantages of privacy, accessibility, and lower cost, may provide women with a good alternative to consultation

Prediction model and prognostic index to estimate clinically relevant pelvic organ prolapse in a general female population

Introduction and hypothesis: Estimation on prevalence and distribution of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) signs in a general female population is difficult. We therefore developed and validated

Vaginal noise: prevalence, bother and risk factors in a general female population aged 45–85 years

Item does not contain fulltextINTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Vaginal noise (VN) is a symptom of pelvic floor (PF) dysfunction and has been described in a few studies. No other risk factors have been described besides parity and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Underlying mechanisms of VN are unclear. Aims of this study were to describe prevalence, bother and relation between VN and PF (muscle)(dys)function. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed on a general population of 2,921 women (aged 45-85 years). Questionnaires were filled in by 1,397 women, and 800 were selected at random to undergo vaginal examination for POP Quantification and PF muscle function assessment. Chi-square tests, Student's t test and multivariate logistic regression were performed (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Response rate was 62.7%. Prevalence of VN was 12.8%; 72.1% reported only a little bother. Odds ratios for parity and solid stool were high. CONCLUSIONS: VN was strongly related to many symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction, but it was only causing a little bother

Treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: a randomized multicenter trial comparing sacrospinous fixation with vaginal hysterectomy (SAVE U trial)

Contains fulltext : 97471.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse is a common health problem, affecting up to 40% of parous women over 50 years old, with significant negative influence on quality of life. Vaginal hysterectomy is currently the leading treatment method for patients with symptomatic uterine prolapse. Several studies have shown that sacrospinous fixation in case of uterine prolapse is a safe and effective alternative to vaginal hysterectomy. However, no large randomized trials with long-term follow-up have been performed to compare efficacy and quality of life between both techniques.The SAVE U trial is designed to compare sacrospinous fixation with vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher in terms of prolapse recurrence, quality of life, complications, hospital stay, post-operative recovery and sexual functioning. METHODS/DESIGN: The SAVE U trial is a randomized controlled multi-center non-inferiority trial. The study compares sacrospinous fixation with vaginal hysterectomy in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher. The primary outcome measure is recurrence of uterine prolapse defined as: uterine descent stage 2 or more assessed by pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination and prolapse complaints and/or redo surgery at 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes are subjective improvement in quality of life measured by generic (Short Form 36 and Euroqol 5D) and disease-specific (Urogenital Distress Inventory, Defecatory Distress Inventory and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire) quality of life instruments, complications following surgery, hospital stay, post-operative recovery and sexual functioning (Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire). Analysis will be performed according to the intention to treat principle. Based on comparable recurrence rates of 3% and considering an upper-limit of 7% to be non-inferior (beta 0.2 and one sided alpha 0.025), 104 patients are needed per group. DISCUSSION: The SAVE U trial is a randomized multicenter trial that will provide evidence whether the efficacy of sacrospinous fixation is similar to vaginal hysterectomy in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR1866

The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse symptoms and signs and their relation with bladder and bowel disorders in a general female population

Contains fulltext : 81191.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: In selected populations, pelvic organ prolapse (POP) was associated with bladder/bowel symptoms, but data on the general female population are lacking. Our aim was to obtain normative data on the prevalence of POP and pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) symptoms and signs and to identify associations. METHODS: Validated questionnaires on POP and PFD (urogenital distress inventory, (UDI) and defaecation distress inventory (DDI)) were sent to a general population of 2,979 women (aged 45-85 years). Data were analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, chi square test and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Response rate was 62.7%. Associations between POP stage and parity (0.002) and vaginal bulging (<0.001) are significant. Anatomical locations of POP and PFD symptoms correlated significantly with incontinence of flatus, feeling anal prolapse, manual evacuation of stool, vaginal bulging, constipation and pain during faecal urge (p < or = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Strategies should be developed to alleviate obstructive bowel disorders associated with POP